Dutch courts can hear antitrust damages case against Apple: EU court rules

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has confirmed that Dutch courts can hear a collective antitrust damages claim against Apple, allowing a major case over App Store fees to move forward.

Two Dutch foundations, Stichting Right to Consumer Justice and Stichting App Stores Claims, filed the lawsuit. They claim that Apple’s in-app payment system — which charges commissions of up to 30 per cent on third-party apps — is excessive and harms users. Although courts have not yet ruled on these claims, the CJEU allows the case to proceed in the Netherlands.

Jurisdiction confirmed

The court focused on the fact that Apple directs its App Store at the Dutch market. Apple offers apps in Dutch and to users with Apple IDs registered in the Netherlands. The CJEU concluded that purchases could cause alleged harm in Dutch territory, even if users were located elsewhere at the time.

The plaintiffs’ filings indicate that roughly 14 million devices (iPhones and iPads) could suffer harm, and they estimate potential damages at around €637 million, including statutory interest. These figures reflect the plaintiffs’ calculation and have not undergone independent verification. The Dutch court is scheduled to hold the merits hearing in early 2026.

Apple’s response

Apple has stated that it disagrees with the jurisdictional ruling but intends to defend itself in Dutch courts.

Apple has faced similar scrutiny in other jurisdictions, most notably in the US lawsuit filed by Epic Games (the maker of Fortnite) over its App Store. While the US court allowed some changes to Apple’s in-app payment system, it did not find Apple to be an illegal monopolist. The Dutch case is different: it focuses on EU competition law and the ability of national courts to hear collective damages claims.

You might be interested

EU lawmakers race to curb cheap steel imports – but manufacturers warn of fallout

Implications for digital platforms

Legal analysts note that the ruling highlights an important principle for digital platforms: targeting consumers in a specific EU Member State can establish legal responsibility there, even when services operate online across borders. This interpretation may influence how regulators and policymakers approach platform oversight in the digital economy.